Respondent Issue number 2.

Conviction. Can be based. On the retracted. Confession.

The term confession. Is used in criminal proceedings. The Privy Council. In Pakala
Narayanaswamy versus. Imperial Lord Atkin. A IR. 1939. PC. 47. 40. Elucidate the meaning and.
Purpose of. The expression. Confession. The confession? Must either. Admit in terms. The
offense., Or at any rate. Substantially. All the facts. Which constitute the offence? Confession.
Are considered. Highly reliable. Because no rational. Person would make admission against his
interest. Unless prompted by his conscience. To tell the truth, deliberate and voluntary
confession. Off guilt. If clearly proved. Are among the most. If actual proof in law. The court must
be satisfied. Before acting on the confession. As article. 23. Sub clause 9 of our Constitution of
India. Prohibits. 2 Extort confession. Against once. Own. Or without his free will. Accused has
right to retract. From his confession. But Inverted comma start. Retracted confession. May form
the legal basis of conviction. If the court is satisfied. That it was true and voluntarily made.
Inverted comma close. Pyarelal. Bhargava versus State of Rajasthan Air, 1963. SC. 1994. Supreme
Court further held in Supra. But it has been that the court shall not base a conviction on such On
such confession. Without. Corroboration. It is not rule of law. But it is rule of prudence. In case
of. Harun Haji Abdullah. Versus State of Maharashtra 1968. 2. SCR. 641. Supreme Court held.
That a retracted confession. Must be looked upon the greater concern. Unless the reasons given
for having made it. In the first instance. Are on the face of damp falls. The court further held
that. The retracted confession is a weak link against the maker. Goes counter a series of
decisions. The acceptability. And credibility of retracted admission statement. Is. Thoroughly
discussed by the Supreme Court. In case. State. Of anxiety Delhi. Versus Navjot Sandhu. 2005.
Dot 122. Dot. ELT dot 194. The court observed that under the Journal Law of Land, as reflected in
the Evidence Act. Confession made to a police officer. Can we proved against accused?
Confession, which is a. Terminology used in criminal. Criminal law. Is a piece of admission as
defined under section 17 of. Evidence Act. Next Better.
In the present case. Both. The accused confessed the offence of murdering summit. Under
section 27 of Evidence Act. And all the circumstantial evidences were corroborated as under.
0.1. Evidence of Mother of Submit
Statement of mother in which she told that summit after coming from office at around 5:00 PM
went out with Ganga and Dave on bike. 0.2.
0.2. Pieces of broken glass of whisky bottle. Which points that they had a liquor together.
0.3. 0.3. Marks of dragging, of heavy substance. Which was? Body of submit. They confessed. To
threw in river.
0.4. 14. Huge amount of blood which points that they have killed submit.
0.5. 0.5. Recovery of knife on the knowledge of both accused under section 27 of Evidence Act.
Which they also. Deposed. In front of. Magistrate under section. 164 of Crpc.

These are. Unerring, unclinching. Incrementing evidence. Pointing toward. The guilt. Off the both
accused. Though There retracted. From their confession. But court? Considering the reasons of
retracting. From confession. That too after the recovery of murder weapon. With the knowledge
of the accused. And considering other circumstantial evidence. Vichar cumulatively. Pointing
towards the guilt of accused. And. Prosecution
Also it is pertinent to mention. That in this present appeal. Dey. Pleaded that they were
convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidences. And discovery under section 27 of. Evidence
Act. That is. Discovered with their knowledge. No where, they have pleaded. That. The discovery
of weapon. Was planted. As in case of. Anurag Verma. Versus. State of UP. 2022. Dot. 08. EC.
Space, CK Space, 0012. Inverted comma starts…. That such recovery is. Absolutely reliable and
cannot be doubted. It cannot be presumed. That weapon is. Planted.